Comparative Domestic Policy Program
Policy Brief
February 7, 2011
Summary: This policy brief ex-
amines European best practices
regarding urban integration of
high speed rail (HSR) stations
to maximize local economic and
sustainable urban development
benefits. The research goal was
to identify lessons for cities in
North America, especially in Cali-
fornia, to achieve sustainable
development through coordinat-
ed land use and transportation
planning around HSR stations.
This brief summarizes research
conducted in Europe from
February-May 2010 as a Com-
parative Domestic Policy Fellow
for the German Marshall Fund
of the United States, drawing on
literature review, site visits, and
interviews with transportation
professionals, urban planners,
academics, and government of-
ficials in Italy, France, Germany,
and Spain.
1744 R Street NW
Washington, DC 20009
T 1 202 683 2650
F 1 202 265 1662
E info@gmfus.org
Planning High Speed Rail Stations for
Sustainable Urban Development:
European Case Studies
by Matt Nichols1
Introduction
High speed rail (HSR) is a relatively
new and rapidly expanding trans-
portation mode, one with potentially
powerful benefits for local economic
development and urban form around
the stations. European cities have long
been shaped by rail transport, but HSR
service is creating new dynamics, with
new opportunities and challenges.
Cities are seeking to maximize the
benefits of HSR through coordinated
transportation and land use planning,
strengthening integrated mobility
options that promote smart growth
and livable communities.
High speed rail is defined by the Euro-
pean Union as rail service traveling
at 160 mph (250 km/h) or faster on
new track, or 200 km/hr on existing
tracks. Tracks are continuous welded
rail, and trains are electrically-powered
via overhead lines, for a very smooth
and quiet ride. HSR further reduces
travel times by eliminating roadway-
level crossings and by not sharing the
right-of-way with freight or slower
passenger trains.
1
Matt Nichols is the principal transportation planner for the City of Berkeley, California. The views expressed here are
those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the German Marshall Fund of the United States, or the
City of Berkeley.
Japan opened the first HSR system, the
Shinkansen — often referred to as the
Bullet Train — in 1964. France estab-
lished HSR in 1983 with the opening
of the Paris-Lyon Train à Grande
Vitesse (high-speed train), or TGV.
HSR expanded with the Eurostar line
to the U.K. and in Germany, and began
to grow dramatically in the 1990s with
rapid national expansion in Spain,
Italy, and elsewhere. In Asia, Korea
and China built major HSR systems.
Worldwide, HSR grew from approxi-
mately 3,100 to 6,200 miles (5,000-
10,000 km) between 1997 and 2009.
In 2009, an estimated 13,500 km of
HSR was under construction. Planning
was underway for an additional 17,600
km, with approximately half of the
planned growth in Europe. The United
States joined the HSR club in 2008,
when a federal allocation of $8 billion
provided support for nine HSR proj-
ects. In California, $2.35 billion in
federal funds and a $9.95 billion 2008
state bond have given momentum to
the planned HSR system, which would
run 800 miles between 28 stations, and
Comparative Domestic Policy Program
Policy Brief
HSR station area developments
have revitalized vacant industrial
areas, attracted commercial and
residential development, and
leveraged major infrastructure
investments.
make travel possible from Los Angeles to San Francisco in
as little as 2 hours and 38 minutes. This has tremendous
potential to transform California’s transit system and the
cities where stations will be built.
High Speed Rail and Urban Land Use
From the start, policymakers recognized the enormous
potential of HSR to shape urban form and stimulate
economic development. Japanese HSR stations were
intended to reduce low-density suburban development by
concentrating new growth in mid-sized transit-oriented
urban centers. France also coordinated HSR investment
with land-use and economic planning to harness the urban
economic growth potential of HSR service.
A great deal has been learned over the past 45 years about
these impacts. In the best cases, HSR has had strong posi-
tive benefits on the economic vitality of cities, increasing
property values, creating jobs, and attracting new private
investment. HSR station area developments have revitalized
vacant industrial areas, attracted commercial and residential
development, and leveraged major infrastructure invest-
ments. The cumulative benefits of high speed rail on local
and regional growth have been referred to as “The HSR
Effect.” In fact, results have been mixed, and HSR does not
automatically deliver positive benefits to all stations. Some
stations remain disconnected and uninspiring; some cities
experience few ripple effects from HSR developments. This
brief will focus on several notable case studies where Euro-
pean cities have succeeded in harnessing the impact of HSR
to great advantage.
2
Seeking the “HSR Effect”
In most cases, national policies and politics have played a
large role in determining initial HSR routes and stations.
Existing rail connections with high ridership, such as the
Eurostar from the U.K. to Paris, have been obvious choices
for HSR conversion. France has sought to use HSR lines and
station sites to generate economic transformation in former
industrial areas. In Spain, the HSR network was conceived
to shorten travel times from all major cities to Madrid to
promote national economic integration.
At the local level, a variety of engineering, economic, and
political criteria have been used to determine the location
of the HSR stations. Cities with established central train
stations most often simply expand to accommodate HSR
service. Other cities, such as Lyon, seized the opportunity
to create a new, second central business district, placing the
station in an underdeveloped area and creating a station
area plan and policies to attract and support growth. Still
others are constructing their HSR urban tracks and stations
underground, and utilizing the new surface area for urban
parks and to support growth. Many places are also investing
heavily in light-rail and bus and bicycle connections to
the HSR stations, leveraging the major HSR infrastructure
investments to develop integrated mobility options with
multiple benefits to the economy and the community. For
this brief, strategies for achieving the desired HSR effect
have been placed into three categories, and one or more
European case studies are discussed in each category.
A. Integrated Station Area Planning
Cities should create and implement a master plan that
will guide future development around the station. Invest-
ments for station area development, local transit, and other
infrastructure can be financed with taxes or policy mecha-
nisms that capture a portion of the increase in value of land
around successful HSR stations.
B. Make Local Connections
Strong local transit access is essential for HSR success: even
though high-speed trains cannot travel as fast as airplanes,
they can deliver travelers into the center of their destina-
tion city, rather than to an airport far outside of town. To
provide a fast and convenient door-to-door travel experi-
ence, HSR stations should be centrally located, supported
Comparative Domestic Policy Program
Policy Brief
by good local transit, and integrated into a dense, mixed-use
urban setting.
C. Creating Great Places
Policymakers and urban designers are increasingly recog-
nizing the “place-making” power of HSR stations. HSR
stations will be used by tens of thousands of people, so
cities should take advantage of the opportunity to create
memorable urban places, with new parks and open space as
well as residential and commercial growth.
In Europe, “undergrounding,” the use of tunneling and cut-
and-cover construction to cover over rail track, rail yards,
and stations, has been a major element of HSR station
development. The new land created on top of rail facilities
offers huge opportunities for creating new urban places.
HSR stations can also provide iconic architecture, and other
urban design features to create more attractive places for
business and tourism.
Case Studies
In 2010, I visited several cities in Europe to investigate their
experiences with high speed rail stations. Lyon, France,
provides an excellent example of the value of Integrated
Station Area Planning. Madrid, Spain, has made incredible
progress expanding local transit and multi-modal stations,
which connect its HSR stations to the larger city. Barcelona,
Spain, has just begun a major “urban place-making” project,
which is creating a new HSR station area with housing,
retail, and public parks.
Lyon, France
Lyon, in southeastern France, is the second largest French
city with a population of approximately 1.2 million, and is
an important business center. In 1981, it was the first major
provincial city served by the French high speed rail, the
TGV. The 5-6 hour trip from Paris to Lyon was reduced to
just 2 hours. HSR travel between Paris and Lyon attracted
many riders immediately, while airline service between the
two cities decreased. Before the TGV, 31 percent of trav-
elers between Paris and Lyon went by airplane; this share
dropped to just 7 percent after TGV.
3
Prior to the opening of the TGV, many had feared that it
would hurt regional business by opening Lyon to greater
competition from Paris. Instead, local businesses benefitted
from being able to conduct business more easily with Paris,
and Paris-based companies opened regional offices in Lyon.
Research also found that HSR did not simply switch air
trips to the train, but actually increased total trips. Nearly
half of all travel between the two cities was estimated to
be new, trips that had not occurred prior to HSR service.
Growth in travel was largely from increased business travel
from Paris-based firms traveling to subsidiary offices, and
from Lyon-based businesses going to Paris. Tourism travel
to Lyon also grew.
Within Lyon, many businesses chose to locate near the new
HSR rail station, Gare Part-Dieu. By 1990, the station area
was attracting 60 percent of new development projects in
the city, and the amount of office space in the area grew by
43 percent. Today, the Part-Dieu area hosts 20,000 jobs and
some 5.3 million square feet of office space.
It is notable that Lyon chose not to locate the HSR station
at its existing Lyon Perrache station in the constrained
historic city center. The city center, located on a densely
populated island, suffered from extreme traffic congestion,
Prior to the opening of the TGV,
many had feared that it would hurt
regional business by opening Lyon
to greater competition from Paris.
Instead, local businesses benefitted
from being able to conduct business
more easily with Paris, and Paris-
based companies opened regional
offices in Lyon.
Comparative Domestic Policy Program
Policy Brief
and offered few opportunities for growth. In fact, Lyon
had already adopted a policy to shift development away
from the physically constrained downtown, and to create
a second urban center well before the development of the
TGV. The city developed a major new commercial area to
the east of the center of town, which included the new Lyon
Part-Dieu TGV station. Following the opening of TGV
service, a major office center, shopping mall, library, hotel,
and residential developments were built around the station.
Many area businesses subsequently moved their offices to
the Part-Dieu area to benefit from easy access to the TGV.
Lyon was able to make good use of two French planning
policy mechanisms that can be used by local government to
influence development. The ZAD (Zone d’Amenagement
Différé, or Deferred Development Zone) was used to stop
land speculation by giving the government the right to buy
land at a price set prior to the opening of the rail system.
This meant that increases in land value around rail stations
were accrued by the government. In addition, the ZAC
(Zone d’Amanagement Concerte, or Concerted (focused)
Development Zone) was used to actively promote develop-
ment. Under the ZAC, the local government was able to
purchase land surrounding the station for development.
They then created a master plan, installed basic infrastruc-
ture, including public transportation, and sold the land to
developers. Developers were required to follow the master
plan, and in exchange received tax and permit benefits.
Since the opening of the TGV, Lyon has invested heavily
in an excellent metro system, light rail trams, high-quality
trolleybuses, and a bike sharing service. Each of these serves
the Part-Dieu TGV station. According to local prop-
erty agents, factors that induced growth near the station
included easy pedestrian access, customer convenience,
heavy foot traffic, and the high-visibility of buildings and
firms from the trains themselves.
Coming full circle, Lyon is now focusing its energy on the
abandoned industrial area south of the Lyon Perrache
train station. The “Confluences” project is redeveloping
abandoned industrial lands and rail yards into housing
and commercial development to capitalize on the location,
which is well served by HSR and local transit and is not as
congested as the now bustling Gare Part-Dieu area.
4
Madrid, Spain
Spain’s AVE (Alta Velocidad Española) HSR system grew
from a national vision of improving access to the capital,
Madrid, which is located in the center of the country. The
first line, Madrid to Seville, opened in 1992. In 2005, the
Spanish government launched an ambitious rail expansion
plan, which envisioned 90 percent of the population living
within 30 miles (50 kilometers) of an HSR station by 2020.
Since then, four new lines have opened, and another 1,380
miles will be completed by 2012.
Major traffic congestion and the establishment of HSR
service spurred Madrid to expand its local transit system.
Although the city has had a subway since 1919, Madrid
began expanding very rapidly in the mid-1990s, making
it one of the fastest growing transit systems in the world.
From 1995-1999, 35 miles of new track were laid and 38
new stations opened. From 1999-2003, another 34 miles
of track and 36 more stations were built. This construc-
tion included adding service to Madrid’s southern suburbs
with a huge loop called MetroSur. Yet another 35 miles
of subway and 43 stations were added between 2003 and
2007. A light rail system, Metro Ligero, also opened in 2007.
More recently, subway expansion has slowed, with just
six miles and seven new stations built since 2007, but the
city continues to expand its bus system and is completing
several suburban rail projects.
As a result of this remarkable growth, the Madrid Metro
system is now the sixth longest in the world, even though
Madrid is just the 50th most populous metropolitan area.
HSR service also had a noted effect on urban areas near
Madrid, mostly notably the town of Ciudad Real, which
was a very small, relatively inaccessible town before 1992.
When the first AVE line opened, people were able to travel
from Ciudad Real to Madrid in less than an hour, and the
town grew about 15 percent over the past decade. Today,
many residents commute every day to Madrid. HSR service
between Cuidad Real and Madrid increased from 18 train
cars per day in 1992 to 47 in 2005, and HSR today essen-
tially operates as a rapid commuter service to the capital.
This access has created an unanticipated class of HSR
commuters referred to as “Avelinos.” However, Cuidad Real
has not simply become a distant bedroom community to
Madrid. It has also succeeded in transforming itself into a
Comparative Domestic Policy Program
Policy Brief
regional university and business center, and a significant
number of people now commute in the reverse direction,
from Madrid to Ciudad Real.
Barcelona, Spain
Currently, Spain’s largest HSR infrastructure and land use
project is in the city of Barcelona. The capital of the autono-
mous Catalonia region, Barcelona is Spain’s second largest
city, with approximately 1.6 million inhabitants, and is the
center of the regional metropolitan area with approximately
5 million.
In 2008, AVE started service from
Madrid to Barcelona and within
its first year attracted 1.5 million
passengers who had previously
flown.
In 2007, 90 percent of travelers between Barcelona and
Madrid flew, making it the busiest air route in Europe and
one of the busiest in the world, with 4.6 million annual
passengers on 45,000 flights. In 2008, AVE started service
from Madrid to Barcelona and within its first year attracted
1.5 million passengers who had previously flown. Train
travel between the cities increased from 600,000 passengers
taking a 4 hour and 35 minute ride per year to 2.4 million
passengers per year taking a 2 hour and 35 minute journey
on HSR.
The HSR station in Barcelona, called Sants, was nearly
doubled in size to manage the volume of AVE service. An
entire subterranean bus terminal and 2,300 space parking
lot were constructed, and 840,000 square feet of commercial
space, including a hotel, were built on the site.
Barcelona also recently began construction of a second
HSR station, called La Sagrera, in the northern Sant Andreu
district of the city. La Sagrera will become the main station
for HSR travel to France and Western Europe, and is
5
projected to handle 100 million passengers per year. It will
also be a major transit hub, with a metro station and local
rail services integrated into the station. A massive tunnel is
being built under the city to connect HSR service between
Sants and La Sagrera stations.
The La Sagrera project also represents a significant HSR
station area “urban place-making” opportunity, with 400
acres of land 2.3 miles in length. The project is incorpo-
rating several obsolete industrial areas and the decom-
missioned Sant Andreu military facility. One hundred
and eighteen acres are planned as urban park open space,
achieved in large part by using “cut and cover” construction
to make new urban land on top of 94 acres of track and rail
yards. The plan outlines 17.2 million square feet of built
space, including 12,887 new dwelling units (of which 43
percent are low-income subsidized housing) and 7.1 million
square feet of office, hotel, and other commercial space.
The overall Sagrera project is estimated to cost 2.24 billion
euros. Of this, about 50 percent is expected to come from
the national, regional, and city budgets; and 50 percent
from the sale of land, offices, and hotels to private devel-
opers.
Barcelona began construction of La Sagrera station in
March 2010. Mayor Hereu of Barcelona welcomed the
project, pointing out that the station was the biggest public
investment project in the whole of Spain. The mayor
highlighted the importance of the linkages resulting from
HSR investment, saying, “La Sagrera is a basic piece in the
mobility system of the Barcelona of the future. It is a major
communication hub that links city neighborhoods, the
metropolitan area, the capitals of Catalonia, and the city
with the rest of Europe.”
Like Madrid and elsewhere, Barcelona has also built an
extensive transit system of metro, commuter rail, and buses
to serve HSR passengers and to reduce urban traffic conges-
tion. In April 2010, a new 2.1 mile segment of underground
metro, including four new stations, went in to operation.
Operating on an automated driverless system, this line will
connect directly into La Sagrera station; completing one of
the final elements of what will be Europe’s longest metro
line.
Comparative Domestic Policy Program
Policy Brief
The “cut and cover” method being used for place-making
at La Sagrera was also used with great success in Cordoba,
also on the original Madrid-Seville line. There, the HSR
covered over the existing track that ran through the center
of the city, and the city constructed hotels, offices, a confer-
ence center, and housing centered around a beautiful linear
urban park built directly atop the tracks. The AVE station
and adjacent bus terminal became an important regional
transportation hub, and Cordoba has been transformed
from an industrial center of a rural province to a growing
regional services center, and increasingly popular tourist
attraction.
Conclusions
These case studies are inspiring and instructive examples
of the HSR effect. Lyon’s integration of land use planning
with its HSR station site selection resulted in successful
economic development and urban development. Madrid’s
place at the hub of Spain’s national high speed rail network
is served at the local level by an incredible investment in
local and regional transit. Barcelona and Cordoba have
literally created new land, providing both green, open space
and urban opportunities in these historic, built-out cities.
There are, to be sure, many other critical variables and
dynamics to consider regarding HSR station area develop-
ment. While the cities I visited are important examples
of success, there are also places that have largely failed to
receive benefits from HSR service. Their experience also
California’s public leaders and
development community should
take advantage of the growth
expected from HSR by creating
plans and programs to encourage
and guide development around
stations.
6
helps illuminate the factors that affect the level of benefits
delivered by HSR.
Both the successes and failures underline the importance
of the station site selection and the station-area urban
planning process in determining the success of the station.
Greengauge, a U.K. HSR planning organization, states
that the “…selection of the location of the high-speed line
station is critical. It must be developed in line with a master
plan, one that fits high-speed rail into the strategy for the
city as a whole. The station location has to fit with the city
strategy. The opportunity for regenerating rundown and
disused areas may include railway land and redundant
industrial area.”
In contrast to Lyon’s Part Dieu success, most of the first
Paris-Lyon TGV route ran through unpopulated rural areas,
and some stations were criticized for being too far from an
existing town to be convenient and too far from connecting
railway lines to be useful. Such stations became known as
“Beet Stations,” which is derived from the criticism of the
Haute Picardie station, which remained surrounded by
sugar beet fields even after TGV opened. The Le Creusot
station also failed to induce economic development. The
station location was selected to offer access to an economi-
cally undeveloped area, with the hope that the station would
grow into a local activity center. This has not occurred, and
studies have found that the poor access limited the benefits
of the TGV. The station was placed far from downtown,
primarily accessible by car, with poor transit links to nearby
towns.
France carefully studied and learned from their initial expe-
riences with HSR and development. For the second TGV
line, the national railway company formed a property devel-
opment subsidiary, which actively promoted development.
In Le Mans and Nantes, they successfully promoted infill
near stations even before the stations were constructed. In
Spain, the national agency Adif now manages all station
construction, and is increasingly focused on adjacent devel-
opment and retail opportunities within stations.
Both the successful case study cities I visited as a Compara-
tive Domestic Policy Fellow and the less successful places
each provide important lessons for High Speed Rail devel-
opment in the United States.
Comparative Domestic Policy Program
Policy Brief
Based on European HSR experiences, California’s proposed
HSR system can be expected to reinforce population and
employment growth trends towards the largest cities in
the regions serves, Los Angeles, San Jose, and San Fran-
cisco. California HSR will also serve the rising numbers of
people in the sprawling Central Valley and will likely favor
agglomeration into the larger Central Valley cities where
HSR stations are being planned. Despite billions in invest-
ment, developing more dense urban centers and improving
connections will pose major challenges to many cities,
particularly where essential transit extensions may be hard
to achieve given economic constraints across the state.
California’s public leaders and development community
should take advantage of the growth expected from HSR
by creating plans and programs to encourage and guide
development around stations. Planning for HSR stations
in California should focus on the creation of activity hubs,
using integrated transportation and land use planning,
investments in local transit connections, and excellent
urban design.
Fortunately, top transportation and land use planners are
working with California lawmakers on HSR and land use
policy, and others are working directly with cities on station
area plans. The Urban Land Institute held a statewide
conference on transit oriented development at HSR stations
in September 2010. The San Francisco Planning and Urban
Research Association (SPUR) just published Beyond the
Tracks: The Potential of High-Speed Rail to Reshape Cali-
fornia’s Growth. In Southern California, cityLAB, an urban
design think tank affiliated with UCLA, received a $250,000
grant to study the urban implications of high-speed rail.
At the same time, land use and transportation planning
throughout California is also changing rapidly, particularly
in response to the state’s landmark Climate Change Senate
Bill 375.
At the birth of high speed rail in the United States, it is
critically important for American policymakers and urban-
ists to learn from the valuable experience of our European
colleagues. Drawing lessons from both the best cities in
Europe and from HSR failures, U.S. leaders can craft poli-
cies to leverage major HSR investments and generate lasting
economic development, build world-class cities, and maxi-
mize the environmental benefits of high speed rail.
About CDP
At the turn of the 21st century, metropolitan regions are home to
nearly three quarters of the population of the United States and
Europe and are projected to continue growing. The major economic,
environmental and social transformations shaping these nations over
the next century, as well as the severe economic crisis facing them
today, will necessarily play out in urban contexts. Thus, the metropoli-
tan built environment, its impact on the natural environment, and the
resources available to citizens will be crucial for successfully meeting
the complex challenges facing the transatlantic community. While
cities in the United States and Europe face similar policy challenges in
related post-industrial contexts, individual communities that attempt
to implement creative strategies have limited opportunities to learn
from one another’s experiences. Recognizing the necessity for com-
munities to collaborate in crafting approaches to local problems that
have global implications, GMF’s Comparative Domestic Policy (CDP)
Program provides a framework for dialogue between individuals who
make, influence, and implement urban and regional policy on both
sides of the Atlantic. At the core of the CDP program is the Transatlan-
tic Cities Network,a durable structure for ongoing exchange among a
select group of civic leaders representing 25 cities in the United States
and Europe.
About GMF
The German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF) is a nonpar-
tisan American public policy and grantmaking institution dedicated
to promoting greater cooperation and understanding between North
America and Europe. GMF does this by supporting individuals and
institutions working on transatlantic issues, by convening leaders to
discuss the most pressing transatlantic themes, and by examining
ways in which transatlantic cooperation can address a variety of global
policy challenges. In addition, GMF supports a number of initiatives
to strengthen democracies. Founded in 1972 through a gift from
Germany on the 25th anniversary of the Marshall Plan as a permanent
memorial to Marshall Plan assistance, GMF maintains a strong pres-
ence on both sides of the Atlantic. In addition to its headquarters in
Washington, DC, GMF has seven offices in Europe: Berlin, Bratislava,
Paris, Brussels, Belgrade, Ankara, and Bucharest.